Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

⇛Marnetmar⇛

Members
  • Content count

    1046
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by ⇛Marnetmar⇛


  1. PT 2:

     

    Now: if I move the split just 8 units to the north...

    image.png.b545444da5615a452f6df7d1095bec9c.png


    The entire setup suddenly stops working again!

    image.png.fddfd6ac3138b0a35de6bde0bc9d523a.png

     

    So the neighboring sectors are not the issue, nor is the size of the rising sector. What could be going on here?


  2. edit: map provided in post #4

     

    (PT 1)

     

    This setup worked perfectly fine until just recently, when it suddenly stopped working after no modifications from me.

     

    This switch makes this water sector raise up to the height of the sector pointed to with the red arrowimage.png.00edd1083814d5e98756e0c66935262e.png

     

    I've confirmed that this part isn't the issue, but for extra information: this line, which the player crosses later, lowers the floor back down.

    image.png.b202be855eb367d4e16f57da736070cd.png

     

    Now, here's where it gets weird. When the initial switch is pressed, the water sector attempts to raise, but something is preventing it from doing so, so the floor stays lowered while the floor raising sound plays perpetually.

     

    image.png.8a4738479be0611fca3b49c79e25f91f.png

     

    Now, I know vaguely that in vanilla (crispy is not vanilla and probably does not have this limitation, but I digress), there's some limitation to how many lines a raising floor sector can have before the engine shits itself. Okay, we'll split the sector in half and add an extra highest floor sector to make sure it still works:

     

    image.png.f1647faba7744f5fb831482dc40d4a03.png

     

    Now the left half works fine, while the right half doesn't work. So evidently, the problem lies somewhere in the right half:

     

    image.png.49ae4e94e46c26ed486dbaa981c23be6.png

     

    Let's move the split. Hmmmm, left side still works:

     

    image.png.3b9fd3316b6c1fa3a4d0902a4f2fce0a.png

     

    Left side still works. The problem clearly has to lie somewhere in the neighboring sectors on the right, right? Think again!

     

    image.png.de5a7128724bbbe1723b921a12b19fb5.png

     

    The problem doesn't have to do with the adjacent sectors, but rather, it has something to do with the latitudinal line highlighted in red: image.png.10e1f7e1b651f8f096559f9dbaf4317c.png

     

    As we can see, when the split is south of this line, the left side works:

    image.png.a092d7499f59a8b599b12eb71c46460d.png

     

    TO BE CONTINUED IN NEXT POST DUE TO ATTACHMENT SIZE LIMITS. IGNORE THE SPOILERED IMAGES, I CAN'T GET RID OF THEM FOR SOME REASON


    ---------------------

    Spoiler

     

     

    image.png

    image.png

     

     


  3. I'm a little extremely fucking alarmed at how dismissive some of the responses here are. Potential TW if anyone needs it:

     

    Spoiler

    For some perspective: I was physically neglected and isolated growing up and spent a good deal of my own life in the foster care system. Many of the life skills that you all take for granted, because you had parents or a support system to teach you, are ones that I had to teach myself. That's all behind me and I'm a reasonably well adjusted adult now, but my point here is: if I was still young and nobody had intervened on my behalf I could easily see myself making a post similar to OP. Does this thread make you, the reader, uncomfortable? Tough shit princess, take a good, long look at it -- this is the reality that some people live in that we as a society have decided to conveniently sweep under the rug.

     

    OP: I know the idea scares you but please, go see a dentist. The rest of you can afford to shut your goddamn mouths for just one single thread.


  4. This topic of discussion occurred to me after watching a demo hfc2x recorded of a level I'm working on. With mapping and monster placement, I think it's unavoidable that you will end up balancing your levels around your own playstyle to some degree. Now, my own playstyle is this: I play Doom extremely recklessly and over-aggressively, arguably to the point where someone might think I'm playing badly on purpose. This puts me in the minority, as it seems most people play about ten times more calmly and strategically than I do.

     

    Thus, I tend to design rooms and fights with the assumption that the player will go in all-guns-blazing and think that I'm hot shit when I playtest my own level and die a hundred times. However, when someone does the objectively more sensible thing of hanging out in the back of the room and picking enemies off until the room is safe to enter, what I thought was a hard-as-balls fight actually turns out to be an easy weenie fight for babies.

     

    Thing is, while playing more strategically is the objectively sensible thing to do, I don't think my own playstyle is wrong. After all, Hugo Martin even has a term for it -- running back and forth across the room, narrowly dodging projectiles, switching weapons mid-fight -- and that term, as you may know, is The Fun Zone™. During Doom 2016 and Doom Eternal's development, id was faced with the question of how to force the player into The Fun Zone™ and keep them there, and the answer ultimately came down to locking players in rooms until fights were over -- I don't like doing this, so I don't do it, but it seems that in the years since 2016 and Eternal's release, nobody has come up with a better solution yet.

     

    What are your thoughts on this? Can you force the player into The Fun Zone™? Should you force the player into The Fun Zone™? And of course, discussion isn't limited only to this topic specifically -- what anecdotes or thoughts do you have about players not behaving the way you expect them to during playtesting?


  5. I think that if we zoom in enough we'll find what are essentially just points with basic properties like spin and charge but which otherwise don't even exist as actual entities in the same way subatomic particles do, but rather only exist in terms of the aforementioned properties, which is really just rephrasing OP but, to go really galaxy brained here, if declaring variables in programming is nothing more than stating "this is a thing that exists and is stored somewhere" then how much of a stretch is it to assume that something similar could apply to our own existence?

     

    Hell maybe subatomic particles don't exist as actual entities either but are instead only the emergent properties of a bunch of the subatomic particles below them coming together, but it is through successive hierarchies of subatomic particles, atoms, molecules etc that something we experience as existence emerges, and existence is actually just the whole sum of parts that themselves don't "exist" in the way our monkey brains like to think they do. So in a sense something does, in fact, come from nothing.

×